WRITTEN QUESTION P-3108/00 by Gorka Knörr Borràs (Verts/ALE) to the Council. State laws on language issues.
Date: 2000-09-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, France, Greece, accession to the European Union, application of EU law, linguistic discrimination

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/19

Under CSF II and the Community initiatives covered by the EAGGF Guidance Section in 1994-1999, a
total of € 159 million was allocated to the forestry sector in Greece as part of a national operational
programme and € 134,2 million as part of 13 regional operational programmes. The Community
contribution was 75 %. The public expenditure under the regional programmes has gone towards
complementary measures targeted more selectively than under the national programme (measures of a
horizontal nature).

So far, most of this funding has been taken up by Greece: € 150 million under the national programme
and € 105,6 million under the regional programmes. The remaining expenditure committed for 1994-
1999 can be carried out by Greece up to mid-2001.

Turning more particularly to the three regions in question, i.e. Attica, the Peloponnese and Epirus, the
ratio of commitments to take-up is as follows:

Region

Committed
amounts

Take-up
amounts

(In million euro)

Attica

Peloponnese

Western Greece

Epirus

13,3

12,0

7,8

13,8

8,9

12,0

6,0

12,2

These sums cover a broad range of activities and a multitude of interlinked project sites in the forestry
laying of forestry roads, stabilising of river banks,
sector, such as fire prevention, forest protection,
reafforestation and forestry development. The number of schemes and the figures above show the intensity
of effort in the forestry sector in Greece, including reafforestation in Attica which contains the Penteli
mountains. In fact, during the period in question, 2 229 hectares were reafforested in Attica, 1 369 ha in
the Peloponnese and 727 ha in Epirus.

Under CSF III for Greece (2000-2006), the Greek national and regional authorities have already made
major requests for funding in the forestry sector in their draft national and regional operational
programmes, including reafforestation and anti-flooding works. The Commission is currently negotiating
these programmes with the national and regional authorities with a view to finalisation soon. The number
of works and schemes in the fields of reafforestation and flood control will appear in the programming
complements that are to be submitted by the Greek authorities to the Commission after it has adopted
these programmes.

(2001/C 174 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3108/00

by Gorka Kn(cid:246)rr Borr(cid:224)s (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(29 September 2000)

Subject: State laws on language issues

On 5 September, the French Presidency of the Council, on behalf of the European Union, welcomed the
fact that the Latvian government had adopted the decrees implementing the law on the country(cid:146)s official
language. The OECD(cid:146)s high commissioner for national minorities, Max Van der Stoel, claims that these
decrees fully meet the undertakings given by Latvia at international level.

There can be no question that it is incumbent on the European Union to ensure that human rights and
minority rights in the applicant countries are respected. These are essential prerequisites for the accession
of any country, as laid down by the Copenhagen criteria. But within the European Union itself, there are
Member States whose laws on language issues and the recognition of minorities leave a lot to be desired.

C 174 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

How does the Council view the discrepancy which exists between the rigorous application of the need to
respect certain fundamental rights in the applicant countries, and the blatant failure to observe such rights
in certain Member States such as France and Greece? Does the Council intend to mandate Mr Max Van der
Stoel to draw up a report reviewing and assessing respect for minorities inside the European Union?

Reply

(8 March 2001)

The Council can only endorse the Honourable Member(cid:146)s analysis of the attitude to be taken in regard to
the applicant countries concerning certain fundamental principles and values which are at the basis of the
Union(cid:146)s very existence. Compliance with the political criteria laid down by the Copenhagen European
Council (cid:129) stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, respect for and
protection of minorities (cid:129) is a pre-condition for any accession and the Union has the necessary means to
verify such compliance on the part of the applicant countries. As is clear from Articles 6 and 7 of the TEU,
moreover, the Union is a community of shared values.

(2001/C 174 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 October 2000)

Subject: EU financing of the planning and construction of a motorway through the Kresna gorge nature

conservation area in Bulgaria

1.
Is the Commission aware of the Bulgarian government(cid:146)s intention to build a motorway through the
valley of the Struma, which flows north to south in Western Bulgaria, to form part of Transeuropean
Corridor No 4 leading from Bulgaria(cid:146)s capital, Sofia, to the Greek port of Thessaloniki? Is the commission
aware that Phare (cross-border cooperation programme) and the European Investment Bank are already
making a contribution to the planning of this road by the Italian firm SPEA Ingeneria Europea?

2.
Is the Commission also aware that the plans for the motorway assume a route through the gorge
north of the city of Kresna rather than the more costly variant of a tunnel outside the Kresna gorge as
advocated by nature and environmental organisations?

3.
Can the Commission confirm that the Kresna gorge is the most important area in Bulgaria for the
protection of unique species of trees, snakes and tortoises which are characteristic of the Balkans and that
because of the great wealth of biodiversity and natural features this area qualifies for inclusion in Natura
2000, the European ecological network, while if this virgin environment is preserved the city of Kresna
can develop as a centre for tourism based on nature, the countryside and health?

4.
Does the Commission agree that road construction and air pollution radically encroaching on the
Kresna gorge and the suburbs of Kresna would not only exceed the economic capability of the city of
Kresna but would also violate the Convention of Bern (in particular Article 4) and (cid:129) following Bulgaria(cid:146)s
accession to the European Union (cid:129) Directives 92/43 and 79/409? Is the Commission therefore prepared
to help prevent natural areas being destroyed and ecological areas being bisected with EU money which
subsequently have to be protected from the time when they form part of EU territory?

In anticipation of Bulgaria(cid:146)s possible accession to the European Union, is the Commission prepared

5.
to work towards a situation where

(a) not only part, but the whole, of the Kresna area with its major natural features is designated an area to

be protected,